AMD Radeon R9 M360 vs NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 is stark. The database records only two overlapping benchmark results, and the Quadro P4000 wins both by a substantial margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P4000 scores 36,212 against the Radeon R9 M360's 8,211, a delta of 341%. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further: 41,786 versus 8,047, representing a 419.3% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

These are not modest differences. The Quadro P4000 delivers more than four times the raw compute throughput in OpenCL, and more than five times in Vulkan. The Radeon R9 M360 is not merely behind; it is in a different performance class entirely. The average benchmark score reinforces this: the Quadro P4000 sits at 9,665, while the Radeon R9 M360 averages 8,129. That 1,536-point gap places the two cards in different percentile tiers relative to the entire GPU database, with the Quadro at the 47th percentile and the Radeon at the 42nd.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card puts the performance gap in context. The Quadro P4000's closest competitors are the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (average score 9,653, only 0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M (9,645, 0.2% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 (9,637, 0.3% behind). The Radeon R9 M360's nearest rivals cluster around the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (8,135, just 0.1% ahead of the Radeon), the NVIDIA GeForce 945M (8,099, 0.4% behind), and the NVIDIA GRID K2 (8,080, 0.6% behind). The two cards' rival pools barely overlap, which tells the story: the Quadro P4000 competes in a league roughly 20% higher than the Radeon R9 M360's peer group.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is fundamental. The Quadro P4000 uses the GP104 chip built on NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 16 nm process. The Radeon R9 M360 uses the Tropo chip based on AMD's older GCN 1.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. That process gap alone explains much of the performance difference: the Quadro packs 7,200 million transistors into a 314 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 22.9 million per square millimeter. The Radeon manages only 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The Pascal chip is nearly five times larger in transistor count and nearly twice as dense.

The compute resources differ accordingly. The Quadro P4000 carries 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Radeon R9 M360 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and just 16 ROPs. That is a 3.5x advantage in shading units, a 3.5x advantage in TMUs, and a 4x advantage in ROPs for the NVIDIA card. Clock speeds also favor the Quadro: it runs at 1202 MHz base and 1480 MHz boost, while the Radeon runs at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost.

Memory architecture is equally lopsided. The Quadro P4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 243.3 GB/s of bandwidth with memory clocked at 1901 MHz (7.6 Gbps effective). The Radeon R9 M360 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering only 72.00 GB/s with memory at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA card has more than three times the memory bandwidth, which matters enormously for texture-heavy workloads and large datasets.

The API support tells a similar story. The Quadro P4000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both cards support the same OpenGL version, but the NVIDIA card has a more advanced DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan revision. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so both rely entirely on traditional rasterization and compute pipelines.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Quadro P4000 wins every recorded comparison. In Geekbench OpenCL, its 36,212 score dwarfs the Radeon's 8,211. In Geekbench Vulkan, its 41,786 score dwarfs the Radeon's 8,047. There is no test in the database where the Radeon R9 M360 comes out ahead.

The use-case split follows the data. The Quadro P4000 is suited for workloads that demand high compute throughput, large memory capacity, and fast memory bandwidth: OpenCL compute tasks, Vulkan rendering, and any application that can utilize its 8 GB frame buffer. Its 5.304 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 165.8 GTexel/s texture rate give it headroom for professional 3D rendering and simulation workloads. The Radeon R9 M360, with 947.2 GFLOPS of FP32 and 29.60 GTexel/s, is suited only for lighter duties where its 4 GB memory and 72.00 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient.

The Radeon does have one practical advantage: it is a smaller chip with far lower power demands recorded in the database. The Quadro P4000 has a TDP of 105 W and requires a 300 W power supply with a 1x 6-pin connector. The Radeon R9 M360 has no TDP listed, no power connector listed, and no suggested PSU listed in the database, which suggests it was designed for lower-power mobile or compact systems. But for raw performance, the Radeon has no recorded wins.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is dramatically faster. It scores 36,212 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the AMD Radeon R9 M360's 8,211, a 341% advantage.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The Quadro P4000 leads by an even wider margin. It scores 41,786 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 8,047 for the Radeon R9 M360, a 419.3% difference.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Quadro P4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 243.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R9 M360 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Quadro P4000 has 1,792 shading units, while the Radeon R9 M360 has 512. The NVIDIA card also has 112 TMUs versus 32, and 64 ROPs versus 16.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The Quadro P4000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Radeon R9 M360 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Quadro supports Vulkan 1.4 versus the Radeon's Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Quadro P4000 is built on TSMC's 16 nm process, while the Radeon R9 M360 uses TSMC's 28 nm process. The Quadro's die is 314 mm² with 7,200 million transistors, versus 123 mm² with 1,500 million transistors for the Radeon.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category:

• Chip and architecture: GP104 on Pascal (NVIDIA) versus Tropo on GCN 1.0 (AMD)
• Process node: 16 nm versus 28 nm
• Transistors: 7,200 million versus 1,500 million
• Die size: 314 mm² versus 123 mm²
• Transistor density: 22.9M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm²
• Base clock: 1202 MHz versus 900 MHz
• Boost clock: 1480 MHz versus 925 MHz
• Memory clock: 1901 MHz (7.6 Gbps effective) versus 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 8 GB versus 4 GB
• Memory bus width: 256 bit versus 128 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 243.3 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s
• Shading units: 1792 versus 512
• TMUs: 112 versus 32
• ROPs: 64 versus 16
• Pixel rate: 94.72 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 165.8 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 5.304 TFLOPS versus 947.2 GFLOPS
• FP16 performance: 82.88 GFLOPS (1:64) versus not listed
• TDP: 105 W versus not listed
• Slot width: Single-slot versus not listed
• Power connectors: 1x 6-pin versus not listed
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus not listed
• Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 1.4a versus not listed
• DirectX support: 12 (12_1) versus 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.2.170
• Dimensions: 241 mm length, 111 mm height versus not listed
• Release date: 2017-02-05 versus 2015-05-04
• Predecessor: Quadro Maxwell versus Solar System
• Successor: Quadro Volta versus Polaris Mobile
• Launch MSRP: 815 USD versus not listed

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is the superior GPU by every recorded metric. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, has more than three times the memory bandwidth, more than three times the shading units, more than five times the FP32 compute throughput, and a more advanced manufacturing process. The Radeon R9 M360's only advantages are its smaller die size, lower transistor count, and the absence of any listed power requirements, which may suit compact or low-power systems.

For users who need compute performance, the Quadro P4000 is the clear choice. Its 341% OpenCL advantage and 419.3% Vulkan advantage over the Radeon are decisive. Its 8 GB memory capacity and 243.3 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for larger datasets and higher-resolution textures. The Radeon R9 M360, with its 4 GB memory and 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, is limited to lighter workloads.

The Radeon R9 M360 does hold a place in the database for systems where the Quadro P4000's 105 W TDP and 300 W PSU requirement are prohibitive, or where its 241 mm length will not fit. But the benchmark results do not support any performance-based argument for the AMD card. The Quadro P4000 is the pick for anyone prioritizing compute throughput, memory bandwidth, or API feature level. The Radeon R9 M360 is the pick only for constrained environments where the Quadro cannot physically or electrically be installed.